94 research outputs found
Recommendations for change in infection prevention programs and practice
Fifty years of evolution in infection prevention and control programs have involved significant accomplishments related to clinical practices, methodologies, and technology. However, regulatory mandates, and resource and research limitations, coupled with emerging infection threats such as the COVID-19 pandemic, present considerable challenges for infection preventionists. This article provides guidance and recommendations in 14 key areas. These interventions should be considered for implementation by United States health care facilities in the near future
Does Chlorhexidine Bathing in Adult Intensive Care Units Reduce Blood Culture Contamination? A Pragmatic Cluster-Randomized Trial
Trials without tribulations: Minimizing the burden of pragmatic research on healthcare systems
Pragmatic clinical trials are increasingly common because they have the potential to yield findings that are directly translatable to real-world healthcare settings. Pragmatic clinical trials need to integrate research into clinical workflow without placing an undue burden on the delivery system. This requires a research partnership between investigators and healthcare system representatives. This paper, organized as a series of case studies drawn from our experience in the NIH Health Care Systems Research Collaboratory, presents guidance from informational interviews of physician-scientists, health services researchers, and delivery system leaders who recently launched pragmatic clinical trials
The social biography of antibiotic use in smallholder dairy farms in India
Background Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) has been identified as one of the major threats to global health, food security and development today. While there has been considerable attention about the use and misuse of antibiotics amongst human populations in both research and policy environments, there is no definitive estimate of the extent of misuse of antibiotics in the veterinary sector and its contribution to AMR in humans. In this study, we explored the drivers ofirrational usage of verterinary antibiotics in the dairy farming sector in peri-urban India. Methods and materials The study was conducted in the peri-urban belts of Ludhiana, Guwahati and Bangalore. A total of 54 interviews (formal and non-formal) were carried out across these three sites. Theme guides were developed to explore different drivers of veterinary antimicrobial use. Data was audio recorded and transcribed. Analysis of the coded data set was carried out using AtlasTi. Version 7. Themes emerged inductively from the set of codes. Results Findings were presented based on concept of ‘levels of analyses’. Emergent themes were categorised as individual, health systems, and policy level drivers. Low level of knowledge related to antibiotics among farmers, active informal service providers, direct marketing of drugs to the farmers and easily available antibiotics, dispensed without appropriate prescriptions contributed to easy access to antibiotics, and were identified to be the possible drivers contributing to the non-prescribed and self-administered use of antibiotics in the dairy farms. Conclusions Smallholding dairy farmers operated within very small margins of profits. The paucity of formal veterinary services at the community level, coupled with easy availability of antibiotics and the need to ensure profits and minimise losses, promoted non-prescribed antibiotic consumption. It is essential that these local drivers of irrational antibiotic use are understood in order to develop interventions and policies that seek to reduce antibiotic misuse
Antimicrobial consumption and resistance in adult hospital inpatients in 53 countries:results of an internet-based global point prevalence survey
Summary: Background: The Global Point Prevalence Survey (Global-PPS) established an international network of hospitals to measure antimicrobial prescribing and resistance worldwide. We aimed to assess antimicrobial prescribing and resistance in hospital inpatients. Methods: We used a standardised surveillance method to collect detailed data about antimicrobial prescribing and resistance from hospitals worldwide, which were grouped by UN region. The internet-based survey included all inpatients (adults, children, and neonates) receiving an antimicrobial who were on the ward at 0800 h on one specific day between January and September, 2015. Hospitals were classified as primary, secondary, tertiary (including infectious diseases hospitals), and paediatric hospitals. Five main ward types were defined: medical wards, surgical wards, intensive-care units, haematology oncology wards, and medical transplantation (bone marrow or solid transplants) wards. Data recorded included patient characteristics, antimicrobials received, diagnosis, therapeutic indication according to predefined lists, and markers of prescribing quality (eg, whether a stop or review date were recorded, and whether local prescribing guidelines existed and were adhered to). We report findings for adult inpatients. Findings: The Global-PPS for 2015 included adult data from 303 hospitals in 53 countries, including eight lower-middle-income and 17 upper-middle-income countries. 86 776 inpatients were admitted to 3315 adult wards, of whom 29 891 (34·4%) received at least one antimicrobial. 41 213 antimicrobial prescriptions were issued, of which 36 792 (89·3%) were antibacterial agents for systemic use. The top three antibiotics prescribed worldwide were penicillins with β-lactamase inhibitors, third-generation cephalosporins, and fluoroquinolones. Carbapenems were most frequently prescribed in Latin America and west and central Asia. Of patients who received at least one antimicrobial, 5926 (19·8%) received a targeted antibacterial treatment for systemic use, and 1769 (5·9%) received a treatment targeting at least one multidrug-resistant organism. The frequency of health-care-associated infections was highest in Latin America (1518 [11·9%]) and east and south Asia (5363 [10·1%]). Overall, the reason for treatment was recorded in 31 694 (76·9%) of antimicrobial prescriptions, and a stop or review date in 15 778 (38·3%). Local antibiotic guidelines were missing for 7050 (19·2%) of the 36 792 antibiotic prescriptions, and guideline compliance was 77·4%. Interpretation: The Global-PPS showed that worldwide surveillance can be accomplished with voluntary participation. It provided quantifiable measures to assess and compare the quantity and quality of antibiotic prescribing and resistance in hospital patients worldwide. These data will help to improve the quality of antibiotic prescribing through education and practice changes, particularly in low-income and middle-income countries that have no tools to monitor antibiotic prescribing in hospitals. Funding: bioMérieux
Pragmatic clinical trials embedded in healthcare systems: generalizable lessons from the NIH Collaboratory
Background: The clinical research enterprise is not producing the evidence decision makers arguably need in a timely and cost effective manner; research currently involves the use of labor-intensive parallel systems that are separate from clinical care. The emergence of pragmatic clinical trials (PCTs) poses a possible solution: these large-scale trials are embedded within routine clinical care and often involve cluster randomization of hospitals, clinics, primary care providers, etc. Interventions can be implemented by health system personnel through usual communication channels and quality improvement infrastructure, and data collected as part of routine clinical care. However, experience with these trials is nascent and best practices regarding design operational, analytic, and reporting methodologies are undeveloped. Methods: To strengthen the national capacity to implement cost-effective, large-scale PCTs, the Common Fund of the National Institutes of Health created the Health Care Systems Research Collaboratory (Collaboratory) to support the design, execution, and dissemination of a series of demonstration projects using a pragmatic research design. Results: In this article, we will describe the Collaboratory, highlight some of the challenges encountered and solutions developed thus far, and discuss remaining barriers and opportunities for large-scale evidence generation using PCTs. Conclusion: A planning phase is critical, and even with careful planning, new challenges arise during execution; comparisons between arms can be complicated by unanticipated changes. Early and ongoing engagement with both health care system leaders and front-line clinicians is critical for success. There is also marked uncertainty when applying existing ethical and regulatory frameworks to PCTS, and using existing electronic health records for data capture adds complexity
Recommended from our members
Daily Chlorhexidine Bathing in General Hospital Units – Results of the ABATE Infection Trial (Active BAThing to Eliminate Infection)
Abstract Background: Universal decolonization with daily chlorhexidine (CHG) bathing with and without nasal decolonization has significantly reduced positive MRSA clinical cultures and bloodstream infections in adult ICUs in several clinical trials. We evaluated whether decolonization was similarly effective in a lower risk hospitalized population. Methods: We conducted a 2 arm cluster-randomized trial involving a 1-year baseline period (April 2013–March 2014) and a 21-month intervention period (June 2014–February 2016). All noncritical care units in a hospital were assigned to the same strategy. These were (1) Routine Care: routine bathing product and frequency and (2) Decolonization: CHG for routine daily bathing (2% leave-on CHG) or showering (4% rinse-off CHG) for all patients plus mupirocin for 5 days for known MRSA. Universal ICU decolonization was in place in both arms by September 2013. Differences between the arms in the outcome rates between the baseline and intervention periods were assessed with proportional hazards models, using shared frailties to account for clustering by hospital. The primary analysis was as-randomized and unadjusted. Primary outcome was any MRSA or VRE clinical isolate attributable to the unit. Secondary outcome was all-cause bloodstream infections. Additional analyses adjusted for age, gender, race, Medicaid insurer, surgery, and comorbidities. Results: We randomized 53 hospitals in 15 states. There were 194 adult units with 189,616 admissions in the baseline period and 340,350 in the intervention period. Common unit types included mixed medical surgical (30%), cardiac (20%), step-down (11%), medical (10%), surgical (10%), and oncology (4%). There were no significant differences between arms in the relative hazards for intervention vs. baseline for either outcome (Table and Figure). Adjusted analyses yielded similar results. Conclusion: Universal daily CHG bathing or showering plus targeted mupirocin for MRSA+ patients in non-critical care units did not reduce the combination of positive MRSA and VRE clinical cultures or bloodstream infections due to all pathogens. Further analyses to assess for any differential effects in high-risk subpopulations will be important. Disclosures S. S. Huang, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in which participating healthcare facilities are receiving contributed product (no contribution in submitted abstract), Participating healthcare facilities in my studies received contributed product; Xttrium Laboratories: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in which participating healthcare facilities are receiving contributed product (no contribution in submitted abstract), Participating healthcare facilities in my studies received contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in which participating healthcare facilities are receiving contributed product (no contribution in submitted abstract), Participating healthcare facilities in my studies received contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in which participating healthcare facilities are receiving contributed product (no contribution in submitted abstract), Participating healthcare facilities in my studies received contributed product; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; E. Septimus, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; K. Kleinman, Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; J. Moody, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; J. Hickok, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; L. Heim, Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; A. Gombosev, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; 3M: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; T. Avery, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; received research funds from Clorox, but Clorox has no role in the design K. Haffenreffer, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; receive research funds from Clorox, but Clorox has no role in the design; L. Shimelman, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; receive research funds from Clorox, but Clorox has no role in the design; M. K. Hayden, OpGen, Inc.: Receipt of donated laboratory services for project, Research support; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; R. A. Weinstein, Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; OpGen Inc.: Receipt of donated laboratory services for project, Research support; C. Spencer-Smith, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; R. E. Kaganov, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; M. V. Murphy, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; T. Forehand, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; J. Lankiewicz, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; M. H. Coady, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; received research funds from Clorox, but Clorox has no role in the design.; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; L. M. Portillo, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; J. Patel Sarup, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; J. Perlin, Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; R. Platt, Clorox: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting clinical studies in which participating healthcare facilities are receiving contributed product; receive research funds from Clorox, but Clorox has no role in the design; Molnlycke: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Sage Products: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed product; Xttrium: Receipt of contributed product, Conducting studies in healthcare facilities that are receiving contributed produc
Recommended from our members
The potential impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on global antimicrobial and biocide resistance: An AMR Insights global perspective
Copyright © The Author(s) 2021. The COVID-19 pandemic presents a serious public health challenge in all countries. However, repercussions of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections on future global health are still being investigated, including the pandemic’s potential effect on the emergence and spread of global antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Critically ill COVID-19 patients may develop severe complications, which may predispose patients to infection with nosocomial bacterial and/or fungal pathogens, requiring the extensive use of antibiotics. However, antibiotics may also be inappropriately used in milder cases of COVID-19 infection. Further, concerns such as increased biocide use, antimicrobial stewardship/infection control, AMR awareness, the need for diagnostics (including rapid and point-of-care diagnostics) and the usefulness of vaccination could all be components shaping the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic. In this publication, the authors present a brief overview of the COVID-19 pandemic and associated issues that could influence the pandemic’s effect on global AMR
Mupirocin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Background
Mupirocin is widely used for nasal decolonization of Staphylococcus aureus to prevent subsequent staphylococcal infection in patients and healthcare personnel. However, the prolonged and unrestricted use has led to the emergence of mupirocin-resistant (mupR) S. aureus. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the prevalence, phenotypic and molecular characteristics, and geographic spread of mupR S. aureus in Africa.
Methods
We examined five electronic databases (EBSCOhost, Google Scholar, ISI Web of Science, MEDLINE, and Scopus) for relevant English articles on screening for mupR S. aureus from various samples in Africa. In addition, we performed random effects meta-analysis of proportions to determine the pooled prevalence of mupR S. aureus in Africa. The search was conducted until 3 August 2016.
Results
We identified 43 eligible studies of which 11 (26%) were obtained only through Google Scholar. Most of the eligible studies (28/43; 65%) were conducted in Nigeria (10/43; 23%), Egypt (7/43; 16%), South Africa (6/43; 14%) and Tunisia (5/43; 12%). Overall, screening for mupR S. aureus was described in only 12 of 54 (22%) African countries. The disk diffusion method was the widely used technique (67%; 29/43) for the detection of mupR S. aureus in Africa. The mupA-positive S. aureus isolates were identified in five studies conducted in Egypt (n = 2), South Africa (n = 2), and Nigeria (n = 1). Low-level resistance (LmupR) and high-level resistance (HmupR) were both reported in six human studies from South Africa (n = 3), Egypt (n = 2) and Libya (n = 1). Data on mupR-MRSA was available in 11 studies from five countries, including Egypt, Ghana, Libya, Nigeria and South Africa. The pooled prevalence (based on 11 human studies) of mupR S. aureus in Africa was 14% (95% CI =6.8 to 23.2%). The proportion of mupA-positive S. aureus in Africa ranged between 0.5 and 8%. Furthermore, the frequency of S. aureus isolates that exhibited LmupR, HmupR and mupR-MRSA in Africa were 4 and 47%, 0.5 and 38%, 5 and 50%, respectively.
Conclusions
The prevalence of mupR S. aureus in Africa (14%) is worrisome and there is a need for data on administration and use of mupirocin. The disk diffusion method which is widely utilized in Africa could be an important method for the screening and identification of mupR S. aureus. Moreover, we advocate for surveillance studies with appropriate guidelines for screening mupR S. aureus in Africa
- …